民國十七年的舊刑法與司法實踐

歷史的精采處，在變與不變之間。為何變？如何變？變得又如何？辛亥一役，清廷傾覆，民國肇建；在北洋政府十六年的風風雨雨當中，雖軍閥混戰、百廢待舉，而刑法的修訂卻備受關注，修正案三度易稿。民國16年，國民政府奠都南京，乃摭取北洋時期刑法修正案舊稿，再加研議，第一部《中華民國刑法》於次年9月間問世施行，今俗稱「舊刑法」。法律規範的背後有制度、制度的背後有思想在影響著。「舊刑法」的歷史際遇相當特殊，它與民元的《暫刑新刑律》有何變化？根深蒂固的倫常條款是否欲拒還留？立法理念與司法實務的運作是否一致？從法律繼受的觀點，它具有何等特質？又何以這部被譽為「兼顧國情及融合刑法新潮流的完備刑法典」，壽命竟祇有短短七年？凡此，都有其一定的歷史因緣，有它的時代意義。遺憾的是，學界罕有深刻論述，為補闕漏，本文將細說這一段往事。

關鍵字

中華民國刑法；舊刑法；暫行新刑律；欽定大清刑律

並列摘要

The fascination of history lies in-between variation and constancy; as we interpret historical variations, the motivation, the process, and the consequence of changes are three common crucial considerations. After Xinhai Revolution unprecedentedly transformed the imperial China into a republic, the Beiyang Government had altered the Criminal Code Amendment for three times while struggling in the post-conflict situations and the new threat of ambitious warlords. In 1927, the subsequent Nationalist Government in Nanjing took over the amendment and put it into reconsideration. By September 1928, ＂the Criminal Code of the Republic of China＂, a. k. a. ＂the Old Criminal Code＂, came into effect. Legal provisions always cling to legal systems, while legal systems constantly cling to legal thoughts. Are there any differences between ＂the Old Criminal Code＂ and ＂the Provisional Criminal Code＂ in 1912? Whether the traditional ethical provisions still existed in the Old Criminal Code? Did the legislative considerations coherently work with the judicial practice? What are the characteristics form the viewpoint of legal reception? Why did the Old Criminal Code which was acclaimed as ＂a complete criminal code reconciling the Chinese traditions and the prevalent legal thoughts＂ only last for seven years? Sadly, the historical karma and significance of the Old Criminal Code has not yet been fully discussed. To fulfill the academic void, this article shall trace the past by details.